Found out that ds1 went out in car with too many passengers and no seat belt.....

[DrZeus]

Found out from ds1 (8) that he went in friends mums car today without a seatbelt on. He had gone to a playcentre and was gone for some time. He only mentioned the car over dinner this evening. Apparently there were too many in the back of the car and they were squashed in. I don't believe there was a booster seat either. I'm really concerned (and pretty pee'd off too) if this was the case. AFAIK it's illegal to carry passengers without seatbelts done up. Not sure how to bring it up with friends mum tho'. DH would have quite happily taken ds to playcentre in our car had we known it was an issue.

She has done something illegal as well as dangerous and stupid and has no right to risk the life of someone elses chid.

You need to say to her that she had no right to take your son in that situation and she will not get a chance to do it again.

without the booster at that age I could live with, but without seatbelt I wouldn't be happy at all,

I wouldn't dream of inviting any of the ds's friends anywhere if I didn't have the space. Rarely arises as we have a 7 seater but if there are more children than seats, I would ask someone else to help with transport. She was out of order and you probably should say something but I have to admit, I am a bit of a wuss myself at berating other parents!

I'd be furious too.

But entirely unreasonably, I'm also slightly nostalgic for ye olde days, when I remember going on days out to the zoo etc with 5 kids crammed in the back seat and another 4 of us sitting in the boot - so much fun, and I'm sorry my DD will never get to do that!

But hey, now I'm grown up I won't even start the car engine up unless I know everyone is strapped in

Perhaps I am overly-anxious but whenever dd (6) is offered a lift by friend's parents I tend to say very calmly " do you have a booster seat or would you like me to send her with one"

The other parent is then a) well aware that I expect dd to be in a booster and b) able to request to borrow ours (or indeed say if the car is likely to be overloaded)

Wouldn't bother me at all but if I had anyone else's child in my care I would check. We were out today with a crammed car and I felt fine about that just like chip mentioning above (so even in 2010 people do it). People have very different views on risk.

You can never assume what other parents will be happy with and really people MUST check. I have had people supposedly checking or children saying yes I can do X and in fact they couldn't. You feel like you want signed permission from the parent sometimes.

Quite surprised to see the outrage on here.

I'm really fussy about car seats but most parents I come into contact with think I'm a nutcase for worrying about it and quite happily transport their children around without seats/in the front of cars before they are old enough etc etc.

YANBU- It's against the law, unless (according to 'the rules' )there were no seat belts available. I reckon this must apply to older vehicles that were manufactured without seat belts. Although you said there were too many passengers for the number of seats, so surely that's breaking the law regardless?

I thought you could put more children in a car than there are seats but not on a regular basis and that then as long as you used up all the seat belts there were there was no breach but I might be wrong.

"Although you said there were too many passengers for the number of seats, so surely that's breaking the law regardless? "

Just to clarify the above, I was referring to the number of seats in the car, not the number of child/booster seats available.

xenia - I replied today to a post of yours on a thread I had started but hadn't gone back to as I've been away. here. you had made some very wrong assumptions about my dh.

i have had 2 share a seatbelt in the past, at the age of 8.
agree you can't go blazing to the parent who did this.
it would be sanctimonious and ungrateful that they even took your dc.

you can rant and rage on here, but noto to the person concerned

imo

I would be upset too. It doesn't matter how short a journey accidents can happen at the end of your road or 40 miles down the road. Other drivers can be travelling at speed through junctions etc. and hit slow travelling safely strapped in kids and cause untold damage.

If a child has no seatbelt they are a potential danger to themselves (going through the windscreen) or hitting others in the car. If the seatbelt was fastened incorrectly (eg. across 2 kids or without a booster that could cause other nasty injuries.

Also if ds mentioned it then it was likely discussed openly at the time the parents acknowledging it wasn't the norm.

Ask ds to name the other occupants of the car to establish numbers.

I wouldn't focus on it being illegal as the real issue is the lack of consent for additional risk taken. You need to be able to trust this family in the future so you need to talk to them about it.

As its done now and could be awkward on the phone I would ask to speak to them face to face without the children. Just be clear that they should have raised any potential car crowding with you in advance as you would have offered to drive.

how irresponsible. I would definitely speak to them. How would they like to see their child hurtling through the windscreen if she had to brake suddenly. Its also highly illegal too and she is not covered on her insurance to take more than the cars capacity

Ah, I am totally right as ever. Not illegal at all just as I thought if there are more children in the car than seat belts BUT of course as I said above you need to check what the parents feel happy with.

"More Passengers than Seat Belts

If there are not enough seat belts or child restraints in the car for all the passengers, then some may legally travel in the rear of the vehicle without wearing a seat belt. "

Xenia - that refers to whether seat belts are fitted - you will see from your car registration document that it specifies the number of seats and therefore the number of people you are insured to carry. this legislation does NOT mean that you can overload your car or put several children in the boot unrestrained

Riven - probably to do with life experiences - my brother was in a very bad car crash and it was only because he and the other driver were wearing seatbelts, had airbags and were driving substantial cars that they both survived. They both spent months in hospital and years later my brother still suffers the physical effects.

People did used to cram loads of people in the car with no seatbelts etc and it was normal, it was also normal not to have smoke alarms, RCDs on your electricity supply etc etc. These things have been brought in because they have been proven to save lives and minimise injuries.

But it doesn't mean we have to accept them all. I wouldn 't ski or cycle in a helmet and I do some activites others might think are dangerous. Thank fully we just about live in a society still free enough to allow parents quite a wide range of risk - either totally molly coddled child not even allowed to take a bus trip alone to the children who go out alone. Perhaps we should try to find a political party which is giong to propose to ablish say 1000 pointless laws. That would be good but they don't want to do that because once you get power you want more of it - power corrupts etc so few want to legislate themselves out of a job I suppose.

your insurance only covers you for the amount of seats in the car so if you want to risk a personal law suit then take the risk. Personally if my child was wearing a seat belt in the front i would not want another childs head smashing into them and killing them. life is far to precious. i ski with a helmet too.